RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 3068, 6 December 1871, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, sth December. (Before I. N. Watt, Esq., KM.)

JUDGMENT. Dowries v. Hawkins.—His Worship gave , judgment herein as follows :—ln this case ' one Wahlquist contracted with the Government to supply certain piles. By a subsequent verbal agreement between the plaintiff - and Wahlquist plaintiff was to supply the piles instead of Wahlquist, but to this arrangement the Government was not a party. The number of piles was supplied, but seven -or eight of them were rejected by the Government, and others were then supplied by plaintiff in lieu of them. Wahlquist became . a bankrupt before all the piles were delivered, and defendant was appointed trustee of his estate. Upon passing his final - examination, Wahlqtiist told defendant that seven piles lying near the jetty were his; -^defendant thereupon took possession, and -sold them to the witness Gray, a timber mer- ■ chant, for £3. Gray subsequently sold them vto the Government at lOd per foot, or £7 for the lot. Plaintiff seeks to recover for eight vpiles the sum of £14 Bs, being at the rate of Is Gd per foot; the price paid by the Government for piles that were not rejected. Although Wahlquist's contract with the 'Government was nob put in, it is evident from the action of all the parties that the •■Government had a right, which was exercised, to reject such piles as were unsuitable, -and that as between Wahlquist; and the plaintiff, Wahlquist had the same right; and lam •of opinion that the act of the Government in rejecting certain of the piles must, so far as this case is concerned, be taken as the act of Wahlquist—if so, then there was no such -delivery and acceptance by Wahlquist as is required by the Statute of Frauds, and the plaintiff was never divested of his ownership of the rejected pilas. Judgment must therefore be in favour of the plaintiff. It remains for me to assess the amount. The plaintiff claims for eight piles, but there is no evidence to show that defendant took more than seven. Again, he claims for the rejected piles the price that was paid for the others. I think I may justly conclude that when Mr Gray, a timber merchant, sold them to the Government in the ordinary course of his business, lie obtained a fair price for them, and therefore assess the damage at this amount rather than at that claimed by the plaintiff, or than ■at that for which defendant sold them. Judgment, for plaintiff, £7, with costs.

QUARTERLY LICENSING MEETING. {Before A. C. Strode, Esq., His Worship the Mayor, Capt. Fraser, J. Griffen, and J. Brown, Esqs., J.P.'s.)

TRAN.SI'ER OF CEXERAL LICENSES,

The following applications for the transfer of general licenses were granted : — Anchor Hotel, M'aclaggan street. ■ —Samuel Hatfield to John Hornby. The house will be known hereafter as the Caledonian Hotel.

Rainbow Hotel, George street. —Frederick Wain to Thomas Hudson.

Bull and Mouth Hotel, Maclaggan street. —William H. Haj'don to Godfrey Jacobs. Alhainbra Hotel, Maclaggan street. — <k>dfrey Jacobs to Benjamin Perry.

Eagle Tavern, Stafford street. —Daniel Berry to Michael Bolund.

Mr B. C. Haggitt appeared for the applicant ; and on some remarks being made regarding the late occupier, it was stated that the house had been conducted in a respectable manner by his wife.

Oriental Hotel, Princes street, M'Cubbin to James Mackay.

— John

Cricketers' Arms Hotel, Princes street south.—E. H. Leary, trustee in the estate of Thomas Farrell, to John Tomkins lloberts.

Kaikorai Hotel.—Charles Maddock Hickling to Thomas Messer.

Borru-: i.iokn'st

John Bowie applied for a bottle license for a house in Maclaggan street.

The Commissioner of Police, Mr Weldon, stated that he had a formal objection to the application, on the ground that there way a sufficient number of bottle license holders in the neighbourhood already.

Mi1 Stout, who appeared for the applicant, stated that one person residing in the immediate neighbourhood had ceased to hold a bottle license, and therefore if the Bench granted the application, the original number of bottle license holders would not be increased.

The Commissioner: The applicant is a very respectable young man, and I understand that the granting of the application is necessary to the continuance of his business. With the permission of the Bench, therefore, I will withdraw my objection.

License granted,

APPLICATIONS l-'OR GEXERAL LIC'EXSES.

The Taieri Arms Hotel, Mosgiel.—Arthur Alexander Webb applied for a general license for this house, which is situated at East Taieri.

Mr Harris appeared in support of the application. He explained that he had a memorial signed by many of the residents in favour of the application, that the population in the district was increasing, and that it would be a public convenience if an additional hotel were established there, as it would disestablish a monopoly which now existed.

Mr M'Keay appeared to oppose the application, and said he wished to present a memorial signed by persons who are opposed to the establishment of another house in the neighbourhood, the name of Mr A. J. Burns being at the top of the list. The Bench, however, ruled that Mr M'Keay had no locus standi.

Mr M'Keay : But surely I can put in the memorial without speaking at all ?

Mr Strode : Of course, the Bench can examine any document.

After some further remarks from counsel on each side,

The Commissioner explained that he had had some conversation with Mr Burns on the subject. He told Mr Burns that he had made enquiries respecting the applicant, that he had reason to believe he was a respectable man, and that he could not consistently oppose his application; further, that the establishment of the Mosgiel factory, the cattle market, and other places of business, rendered a second house necessary, and that he had no objection to the applicant personally. He (the Commissioner) lodged his objection before enquiries regarding the house were completed, and since they had been completed he was of opinion that the objection ought to be withdrawn. Had his enquiries been as full on a previous occasion as they were now, he would not have opposed a former application for a license.

Mr Strode said the circumstances under which the present application had been made differed from those presented to the Bench previously. The application would be granted.

Pacific Hotel.—John Campbell Galloway applied for a license for the Pacific Hotel, situate at the junction of St. Andrew and Great King streets.

Mr Stout: I appear for the applicant; a similar application has been before the Bench. Mr Strode : Just six times.

Mr Stout said lie was not aware of that fact. The house, however, was a good one, and the other licensed houses in the neigh-boni-hood were situated a long distance from it. The Commissioner had no objection to urge against the applicant, and therefore he thought the Bench could have no reason for refusing to grant a license.

The Commissioner said he certainly had no objection to urge against the applicant ; but there being so many licensed houses in Dunedin he felt it his duty to object when it was proposed to unnecessarily increase the number.

Mr Strode : Is not the applicant already interested in another public-house ?

. The Commissioner: I know it privately, your Worship.

Mr Strode: I know it publicly, because he has made an application to me. Mr Stout explained that the license for the other house had been obtained in the name of the present applicant's partner. If the application which his client now made were granted, he would relinquish his interest in the other house.

Mr Strode said the words of the Act were "no person shall hold more than one license of any kind."

Mr Stout : The present applicant does not hold it; the other license is to be held by his partner.

Mr Strode: That seems to be an evasion of the Act.

Mr Stout said it was not intended to evade the Act.

Mr Strode : I cannot look upon it as anything else. Mr Stout : I would have stated the facts at the opening if ■ Mr Strode explained that he did not mean to say that counsel contemplated an evasion of the Act.

Mr Stout said that the applicant must retain his interest in the other house until he obtained the license which he now applied for, otherwise he would be thrown out of employment. He thought the applicant's case scarcely came within the meaning of the Act. Mr Strode : Not even the spirit of the Act? The Commissioner suggested that the applicant could not come to Court with the intention of disguising the fact of his being interested in another house, because he was aware that it was known to His Worship.

Mr Strode said that independent of the fact mentioned, the Bench were of opinion that the application ought to be refused. An application for a license for the same house had been made six or seven times, and the Bench considered that another public house was not required in the neighbourhood. The ai>plication therefore would be refused.

Harp of Erin.—Francis M'Grath applied for a license for the Harp of Erin Hotel, situated at the junction of St. Andrew and Great King streets.

Mr Harris appeared for the applicant. He believed an application had been made six or seven times for a license for this house.

Mr Strode : Seven times ; the applications in the present case exceeded those made in that disposed of a few minutes ago by one.

Mr Harris added that on a previous occasion a numerously signed memorial was presented, and that the applicant could have presented one on the present occasion if it had been deemed necessary. The population in the district was increasing, the house was in good condition, and the applicant bore an unexceptionable character.

The Commissioner said that the only objection which he had to urge was that another hotel was not required in the district. He had no objection to urge against the applicant.

Application refused.

Globe Hotel,—Amy Diamond applied for a license for a house to be known as the Globe Hotel, situate in Princes street south.

Mr Stout appeared for the applicant. He stated that the ground on which the house had been erected was leased from Messrs Cargills and M'Lean. Notice of the intention of the applicant to erect a hotel on it had been given. A blacksmith's shop had also been erected in the immediate neighbourhood as a convenience for carriers and other travellers who, with their horses, frequently passed through the City, and the applicant

had been requested to put up a hotel, with

stabling, for the accommodation of many of those persons. The house was constructed of brick, was well built, and large enough to afford ample accommodation, and it had been erected with the sanction of Mr Cargill. In addition to these facts, counsel urged that the establishment of first-class houses in the city should be encouraged, as it would tend to reduce the number of those houses which were not of a suitable character.

The Commissioner said he had no objection to urge against die applicant or the house. The only objection was to increasing the number of hotels.

Mr Strode said that a majority of the Magistrates considered that there was no necessity for another house in the neighborhood. The application, therefore, would be refused.

Kensington Hotel.—Timothy Hayes applied for a license for a house situate, in Park street, Kensington, to be known as the Kensington Hotel.

Mr Harris appeared for the applicant. The Commissioner said ho had no objection to the application. There was no other licensed house in the immediate neighbourhood. He had been informed that one of the reasons why the applicant now asked for a license was that he had been frequently asked by persons to serve them with liquor, but that he had always refused to contravene the law.

Mr Harris presented a memorial, signed by persons residing in the district, and who are favourable to the application. He said there were 300 inhabitants and (30 householders : that i>7 out of the latter number signed the memorial; the signatures of two* others could not be obtained because they were temporarily absent from the district, and only one, who was opposed to hotels hi Mo, had not signed the memorial.

Application granted,

Woodland's Eailway Hotel. — William Woodland applied for a license for a house situate at Caversham, known hitherto as the All Nations Hotel, but to be known hereafter as Woodland's Railway Hotel. The Commissioner said he wished to withdraw the objection which he had lodged against this application. The house had been previously occupied as a hotel, and this was an application to continue the license. If the house had not been previously occupied as a hotel, he should object to it.

Mr Strode : The old license has virtually lapsed.

Mr Woodland informed the Bench that he had considerably improved the house. "It is quite different," said he, "from what it was."

Mr Strode said it was very desirable that it should be, because when he visited the house, oi.'. the occasion of a recent tragedy, it was one of the most miserable, dirty, filthy places he had seen since he had been in the Colony, and that was saying a good deal. Mr Woodland : It is quite different now, your Worship.

Mr Harris, in the iuterest of persons for whom he had acted on a previous occasion, also spoke in favour of the application. Mr Strode said the Bench were unanimously of opinion that there was a sufficient number of licensed houses at Caversham without the All Nations Hotel. If the applicant had incurred any expense in the expectation of obtaining a license, the Bench were sorry for him, but it was not their fault. In refusing the application, they were merely endeavouring to effect a reduction in the number of licensed houses.

Application refused

The Court then adjourned,